To the Editor:
Why, I wonder, would someone form a task force devoted to the analysis of the status of women at Dartmouth and then deny voting "membership" to those most knowledgeable in that area? How, I wonder, does someone justify excluding those who have been studying the status of women, on academic and personal levels, from membership in a group doing just that? When, I wonder, did knowledge and interest become qualities to avoid? Oh yes, I forgot, we are talking about women's studies and feminism.
Members of the Task Force on the Status of Women at Dartmouth were chosen on the basis of "creativity, open-mindedness and diversity," according to the article in The D ("Women's task force convenes," Jan. 24). Many applicants involved with "feminist" issues on campus were passed over in favor of those who had no "pre-conceived notions about women at Dartmouth." Do these people really exist? According to the article, "members of the task force each have specific goals they hope to accomplish."
Senior Class President Dan Garodnick's hand picked representatives fall short of his "agendaless" membership critieria. Everyone has an agenda. Apparently, some - those not associated with feminism - are more acceptable, more "objective," than others.
Had this been a task force on the status of Native Americans at Dartmouth, would Native American student leaders and those who had taken Native American courses have been excluded? I do not think so. Why is it that similar criteria shaped selection for the women's task force?
Garodnick implied in Moday's article that his selection process was a preventative measure against the emergence of "a forum for man-bashing." Apparently, Mr. Garodnick succumbs to the archaic and ill-informed belief that feminist and closed-minded man-hater are synonymous.
The fact that he focuses on the status of men within a group dedicated to focusing on the status of women is problematic. Often times male experience is used as the standard by which female experience is measured. The assumption, that in order to discuss the status of women we must relate it to the status of men, needs to be eradicated. That this line of thought has been introduced in the fledgling stages of this task force assures that the status of women at Dartmouth will indeed be evaluated in this way.
As a senior and women's studies major, I am disappointed to hear of my classmate's sterotypical assumptions. Women's studies is an academic discipline covering a vast spectrum of theories, philosophies and concepts. These tools are rooted in and used to evaluate gender relations and the status and activities of women. Studies are done in the fields of psychology, economics, African American literature, history, philosophy and even engineering. There are that many different schools of feminist thought. To lump us all together is bad enough. To lump us all together and then label us incorrectly is absurd.
I do not find fault with Garodnick's process because he is a man. I simply speak out against what I feel to be an irresponsible combination of ignorance and authority.
MEGAN MITCHELL '94
